As horrible as things seem right now --- with sociopathic loons on one side of the aisle, cowardly failures on the other, a mainstream corporate media completely out of touch with virtually everything that matters, an economy in which everyone but the rich are gasping for air --- there is one very bright spot on which we can all take great comfort.

Rights win.

It rarely happens immediately, and almost never without a far-too-long struggle, but rights for we, the people, almost always eventually win in this nation --- usually against all odds, avarice, greed and ignorance --- but our Constitution is brilliant enough that rights eventually win out.

If you have any doubt, look no further than the latest news (video posted below) heralding the last dying gasps of institutionalized homophobia in our laws and in our military.

The good news is: the haters have lost. The question which played such an enormous --- if entirely trumped up --- role in our Presidential elections just 6 years ago has been all but finally settled.

Well before the end of this decade (and likely far sooner than that, perhaps even before the end of Obama's first term in office), marriage equality for gays and lesbians will be recognized in every state in the union, and homosexuals will be as welcome in our nation's military as African-Americans.

It's over. The good guys have won. In these quiet victories of rights over wrongs, we can all take some quiet comfort, even in these maddening, ugly days...

The bad guys may not have come to terms with it yet, they may not have even noticed yet, but they have lost. The Constitutional right to "equal protection" under the law eventually wins. And there is nothing that all of the hateful politicians, brain-dead media and disinformed citizenry can do to change that.

Just for the record, on Friday, the George W. Bush-appointed judge who had previously rejected an Air Force Major's lawsuit contesting her discharge from the service under "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT), after being outed by a third party, has reversed his previous finding and ordered that she now be re-instated. Her rights were violated when she was discharged through no fault of her own.

That follows another finding by a federal judge just two weeks ago that DADT was an unconstitutional violation of First Amendment rights, which followed the finding of a federal judge a few weeks before that California's Prop 8 constitutional ban on same sex marriage was also unconstitutional, all of which follow one finding after another by one (Conservative) court after another over the past one, two, three, six years (eg. here, here, here, here) that gay people cannot be discriminated against when it comes to their right to marriage.

In 2004, in one of our earliest postings, amidst all the phony sturm und drang about it, we told you that "gay marriage" was a "done deal". And so it is, or will soon very much be.

As bad as everything seems right now --- actually is right now --- take heart. Rights will always win. Eventually. We shall overcome.

(And there's nothing Fox "News", evil Republicans, cowardly Democrats, deviously disinformed Americans or anybody else who hates the Constitution and American Values can do about it. So have a nice weekend.)

* * *

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show breaks the news of the latest federal court finding on Friday, ordering the re-reinstatement of Air Force Major Margaret Witt and interviews her about the decision...

Maddow discusses the Constitutional matters related to the case with Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley...

Brad, I am not trying to be provocative, honestly. I'm just feeling "back here" trying to figure out why it's good that anybody is in the military. Look at history. Military forces have been the muscle for imperialism and rich people's fortunes. Why is it a victory that anybody still wants to perpetuate these things?

I'm always glad when there's equality for marginalzed people in any society, but what's the gain here? They get to prop up anti-democratic plutocrats and imperialists at the risk of their lives.

Brad. Guess we liked ya as the sharp tongued optimist in the face of a dark future kinda guy you previously were. If the wingnut puppets of the oligarchs are standing by for this brief interlude of honesty, there's sure to be a reason. Distraction from something more heinous is the minimum.

@PAul - good perspective but unfortunately until we stop imperializing, the military has actually been an institution for forward progress of our country. It's a giant perverse jobs program, it is one of the few orgs that is not that racist and tends to be more objective about promotions etc, and now it will be an institution respecting open gay people.

Our country's history is full of contradictions like this. America in the late 1700s was force for genocide and slavery. And yet, I think the world was/is better off for the fact the colonies revolted and established our Republic. The slavery and genocide would have likely happened whether land was ruled by Brits or a democracy that included local slave owners. However, I believe, the Constitution, even with slavery as part of it, was a step forward.

While I agree that we should never lose sight of the ways we are still so far from right, I feel we should also always celebrate anytime we right our way.

I agree with Brad, rights win. As Lincoln said, we should keep the faith that Right makes Might.

When exhorting citizens to not let slavery expand to free territories, Lincoln said:

Paul - I despise the way the fossil fuel industry conducts business. Arguably, they have caused as much, if not more, harm to the world as good.

Nonetheless, I have nothing aginst the rank and file man and woman who work for them, to feed their family by way of an honest day's pay.

Yet, if these despicable companies were to discriminate against anybody and deprive them of their Constitutional rights to equal protection under the law, I would call them out for it, and then celebrate when they were ordered to end that heinous act by a court of law.

My celebration that rights eventually win out for those who choose to serve in the military has nothing to do with my respect, or disrespect, for the institution itself. (Or even the institution of marriage, for that matter.) That can be left for another blog item (or not) someday.

This item is meant by way of noting that our Constitutional principles are solid enough to withstand even the most hate filled, well-funded campaigns aimed at destroying them --- even though, as I note in the piece, it often takes far too long for the rights of the minority to win out over the tyranny of the majority. But win they do and will.

In Witt the court decided the case on the basis of a substantive due process argument that is analogous to the right of privacy which gave rise to Roe v. Wade, noting.

The Ninth circuit enunciated a constitutional test that must be applied to DADT. Because DADT constitutes an ‘intrusion upon the personal liberties and private lives of homosexuals…it is subject to heightened scrutiny. To survive plaintiff’s constitutional challenge, the statute must, (1) advance an important governmental interest, (2) the intrusion must significantly further that interest, and (3) the intrusion must significantly further that interest.

While substantive due process was mentioned in Log Cabin Republicans, that case turned on very different grounds--the First Amendment rights of homosexual service members.

Neither Witt nor Log Cabin Republicans entailed application of the Equal Protection clause to the DADT. In Perry, Judge Walker found that California's ban on same sex marriage violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Witt is a much more narrow decision than Log Cabin Republicans. Witt notes that the 9th Circuit imposed a case-by-case basis for determining whether the statute meets the three pronged test for a specific individual basis to “avoid making unnecessarily broad constitutional judgments.”.

This means that there may well be cases in which the government can meet the three pronged test, in which case an individual service member could still be discharged under DADT.

If AG Holder were to accept Judge Phillips ruling in Long Cabin Republicans, however, it would be the death knell to DADT in all cases because her ruling includes a permanent injunction against enforcement.

In Perry, Judge Walker applied the strictest form of scrutiny to Prop 8 in his equal protection analysis, but ruled that Prop 8 would not survive the lowest form of scrutiny--rational basis test.

The fact that the 9th Circuit applied a heightened scrutiny but not strict scrutiny in Wittt does not mean that it would disagree with Judge Walker in Perry as the lack of a state interest in preventing same sex couples from enjoying an equal right to marry is fundamentally different from the military's claimed interest in unit cohesion.

There is a good chance that the 9th Circuit will not even reach the substantive issues and will ultimately dismiss the appeal in Perry for lack of standing.

This is not the appropriate thread for it so I ask you to start a new thread to discuss it and I will repost on that new thread.

TV Network Channel 7 has recently broadcast a deceptively edited program on alleged security weaknesses at the Commonwealth Games site in Delhi that is a masterpiece of dishonesty analogous to O'Keefe Breitbart Acorn tapes.

This Australian Broadcasting Commission Media Watch transcript is of a program that deconstructs the Channel 7 program.

Everything said in the Channel 7 program is actually true to the letter while the implications that a viewer would take from it if he does not parse the words with the skepticism of an opposing lawyer are completely false.
e

I am very happy to see this turn of events and I hope for a proper outcome to this ridiculous issue.

Who among us has the right to pick and choose who is less a human than anyone else? I am not gay but I really don't care if people are. None of my business and they are no different than I am. It is absolutely absurd in the year 2010 that we are arguing about who is gay and who is not. This is stone age stuff.

This was a bit confusing to me. I'd like to think that human rights win out, and I'm sure there has been some progress - but I hear other voices telling me that a lot of rights have been taken away in the last few years.

I look forward to the day when sexual deviants are allowed to adopt children and serve openly in the military. I can't believe that anyone would condemn or oppose this! I am in the Navy and I want our homosexuals to be free to tell us about their sexual deviation and I want them to be loud and proud! I want to be able to look around me and 24/7 on a 6 month deployment and take comfort in knowing that the people who I'm working closely with and sharing living quarters with are sexual deviants. I want them to be able to walk around on the boat all day long proclaiming their deviation for me and all of my fellow honorable service members to hear, including the Captain, the Commodore and all of the marines on the boat! I will not rest until sexual deviants are practicing their deviation openly, loud and proud, in full military uniform. Dear God please get them into the service. And to those of you that are in the service having to conceal your sexual deviation; thank you for your service! We're gonna make sure you can be open, it might take some more work, but we'll make it happen!!! God bless you guys

Rig - Apparently you didn't read the article. You lost this one. The U.S. Constitution trumps the hate and paranoia and psycho-sexual dysfunction of folks like yourself.

Sorry. Perhaps you can sign up for the military in a country who accepts haters and homophobes like yourself. I understand the Afghan army is looking for a few good men. So is the Taliban. Sounds like you'd be well qualified for both.